get_spreadsheet_info

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'Gets' and the explicit 'Returns: formatted spreadsheet information...' clearly signal a read-only metadata operation with a defined output. It omits auth or error caveats, but for a simple getter that is not a major gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with a clear purpose sentence, then uses tidy Args and Returns blocks. Every line carries useful information and there is no fluff or unnecessary repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter getter, the description is complete enough: both required args are explained and the return content is specified. It does not discuss authorization preconditions or error cases, but the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema reduce the need for that detail.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It gives meaningful semantics for both required parameters: user_google_email is the user's Google email and spreadsheet_id identifies the target spreadsheet. The descriptions are minimal and provide no ID format or sourcing example, so it is not a 5.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it gets information about a specific spreadsheet, including its sheets. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_spreadsheets and read_sheet_values, which handle listing or cell-level data.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'specific spreadsheet' gives clear selection context: use this when you have a spreadsheet_id and need metadata or sheet list rather than listing all spreadsheets or reading cell values. It does not explicitly name exclusionary alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.